NAB filed a challenge Friday to the FCC's Dec. 26 quadrennial review order in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, joining a number of similar challenges filed in other circuits (see 2402250001). The cases are all to be consolidated in the 8th Circuit under the order of the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (see 2403050075). The FCC failed to meet its statutory obligation to review ownership rules every four years, exceeded its authority by tightening rules rather than relaxing them, and violated the First Amendment by limiting stations from airing multiple top-four networks on multicast channels, alleged NAB in its petition for review (docket 24-1055). The new rules are content-based restrictions on television stations outside the FCC's authority, said the petition. The FCC also ignored the will of Congress and violated the Administrative Procedure Act by not considering evidence in the record on competition faced by broadcasters. “The record shows that advertisers are increasingly diverting resources away from local radio and television stations in favor of digital promotions,” the petition said. “But the Quadrennial Order disregards these bedrock changes in the media and advertising landscape.” The court should vacate and set aside the order, NAB said.
NAB and backers of the AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act (HR-3413/S-1669) are continuing to push for the bill’s passage, possibly by attaching it to a future omnibus appropriations package. The bill's supporters argue attaching the AM radio legislation to an omnibus appropriations package could help it overcome headwinds that have prevented its legislative approval since early 2023 (see 2401050065). CTA and other opponents of the measure argue it should go through a normal legislative process.
The legal battle over the FCC’s 2018 quadrennial review order appears headed to the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation randomly selected that circuit from the three where petitions for review were filed, said a consolidation order Tuesday (see 2402250001). The 8th Circuit was the venue for an appeal filed by Zimmer Radio. The other possible circuits in the lottery were the 5th and 11th, where appeals were filed by Nexstar and Beasley Media, respectively. All previous QR challenges were decided by a panel in the 3rd Circuit, but after a 2018 U.S. Supreme Court decision, that panel no longer has jurisdiction in the matter. The 5th, 8th and 11th circuits are seen as having conservative leanings, while the 3rd Circuit is considered more favorable to parties seeking to uphold regulations. Parties in the case could still seek to have it moved to a different circuit, but attorneys familiar with appellate procedure told us that rarely occurs. With the circuit for the case decided, it's likely that more challenges to the order will be filed, including an anticipated one from NAB, attorneys told us. Only circuits where appeals were filed in the 10 days after the order appeared in the Federal Register are added to the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation’s lottery.
The FCC faces three petitions for review, all filed Friday, in separate circuits, challenging the lawfulness of the commission’s Dec. 26 quadrennial review order for allegedly violating Section 202(h) of the Telecommunications Act. Nexstar Media Group filed its petition (docket 24-60088) in the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Beasley Media Group and Tri-State Communications filed their joint petition (docket 24-10535) in the 11th Circuit, and Zimmer Radio of Mid-Missouri filed its petition (docket 24-1380) in the 8th Circuit.
The FCC should create an Office of Civil Rights, The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights Media and Telecommunications Task Force told FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel in a meeting last week, according to an ex parte filing posted Thursday in docket 22-459. The existing Disability Rights Office and Office of Native Affairs and Policy perform important functions but are focused on different tasks than an Office of Civil Rights would be, the filing said. “Resolving individual disputes or encouraging participation” are different matters from “legal and quantitative analysis that could proactively identify systematic problems” and addressing those problems with rulemakings and enforcement actions, the filing said. “Intergovernmental consultation may belong in the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, but civil rights enforcement does not,” the filing said. The Leadership Conference also called on the FCC not to leave the 2022 quadrennial review open past 2024, keep ISPs active in encouraging digital equity, and endorse the FCC’s collection of workforce diversity data. Representatives from groups including the Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Communications Workers of America, National Coalition on Black Civic Participation, National Hispanic Media Coalition and Common Cause also attended.
The 2018 quadrennial review’s extension of the top-four prohibition to include low-power TV stations and multicast channels takes effect March 18, the FCC said in a public notice in Friday’s Daily Digest. The order was published in the Federal Register Thursday, which means the 60-day clock for entities to challenge the rule in the courts has begun. It is widely expected that NAB will bring a challenge before the deadline (see 2401020042).
Industry lawyers and analysts expect a busy start for the FCC in 2024, with the 3-2 Democratic majority able to approve items without the FCC’s two Republicans, and Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel eager to address priorities before the usual freeze in the months before and after a presidential election.
The 2018 quadrennial review order supports Gray Television's arguments against the FCC’s $518,000 enforcement action over a 2020 transaction involving an Anchorage station, Gray told the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a response letter Thursday. Gray was responding to an FCC letter last week giving the court notice of the QR order, which was released in December. Gray has argued that the agency created a requirement for what data is used to determine station rankings without notice when it issued the forfeiture in 2022 (see 2307240065). Ratings data from the time of the transaction showed Gray already owned two of the top-four stations in the market, which the broadcaster has argued means the Anchorage deal didn’t result in a new top-four combination -- instead an existing top-four combination added another station. The FCC has argued that this ratings data wasn’t available to Gray when it made the deal and so is invalid. The QR order changes the ranking methodology to use “available data over a 12-month period immediately preceding the date of application,” Gray told the court Thursday. The inclusion of the word “available” in the QR order “underscores its prior absence, and it highlights the FCC’s failure to provide Gray with fair notice of such a requirement which the FCC invented to justify penalizing Gray,” said the broadcaster. The QR order also doesn’t show that applying the agency’s rule against affiliation swaps to Gray’s purchase of a station’s network affiliation “furthered an interest in competition, as the First Amendment requires,” Gray told the court. “Thus, nothing the FCC said in the 2023 Order cures the fatal defect in the Forfeiture Order.” Oral argument in the case is set for March.
As the FCC sees increased dissent votes by Republican minority commissioners, those dissents frequently challenge agency authority. That's becoming a more common line of argument among GOP commissioners across federal regulatory agencies, often based on the U.S. Supreme Court's major questions doctrine, administrative law experts tell us. Republican commissioners and former commissioners say dissent votes are a reflection of the Democratic majority pushing partisan issues. Commissioner Nathan Simington in a statement said he is "disappointed that the Commission is now focused on misguided, partisan items, but I remain hopeful that we can continue making progress on real, non-partisan solutions to long-standing technical issues."
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit accepted the FCC’s 2018 quadrennial review order and dismissed NAB’s petition for a writ of mandamus as moot, a discharge order Tuesday said (docket 23-1120). NAB had asked the court to compel the FCC to act on the 2018 QR. Both NAB and the FCC requested the dismissal after the agency issued the 2018 QR one day before the court’s Dec. 27 deadline (see 2312280018).